The more I study this report the more I get convince that "data can be beautiful" but it can also be created and defaced to suit whatever narrative you want to build.

The study in a nutshell:

1. Volunteers chose their preferred site, and then went and sorted the plastic garbage into brands
2. Since there were covid lock downs in places, it seems volunteers were allowed to sort throught their own garbage in some instances (this seems absurd and maybe I misunderstand).

Obvious limitations:

1. The volunteers are mostly youth so the sites they are choosing are more likely to be dominated by brands such as Coke and Pepsi Co.

2. The results are absolute. Given thay coca cola and Pepsi are massive players, there share in any garbage pile will always be the highest. Regardless of how much they collect to recycle they are always likely to top this. A better reflection of their hand in plastic pollution would be the plastic landing in garbage as % of their sales in a an area.

P.S - Not saying coke, Pepsi are innocent in plastic pollution. But such nonsensical school project studies just seem to arm them to counter these narratives. If this study were to garner enough traction, coca cola and all would just take it apart on any serious forum.

It's very hard to take this report seriously considering their choice of font for the headings...